I think that might be the case. It looks like it's going to be an APFS read only container. However, that might mean that circumventing it could actually just mean getting it to work on HFS. That would probably be too easy and would lead to an unsatisfactory result if it actually does work.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
macOS 10.15 Catalina on Unsupported Macs
- Thread starter 0403979
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Well Kelian Dumerais (@MLforAll) has all of the source code for MacPostFactor. I only have pieces of it, but I can probably ask him whenever he's online.I'm planning on documenting how macOS Patcher works. I think using a bash script and simple Apple scripts for the Patch Integrity Protection GUI, allows somewhat experienced users to more easily understand how macOS Patcher works. I would like to document all of this as I have a vast knowledge base from browsing threads and reversing engineering other patchers but unfortunately I don't currently have the time. Luckily, summer holidays are in a month so I should have plenty of time away from school to work on macOS Patcher, OS X Patcher, and associated documentation to come. It's also a question of priority. I'd rather work on creating the tool, than documenting it. But as I said, once I have more time then I can catch up on that.
[doublepost=1559591992][/doublepost]
I think I'm the only one with any interest in a retro patcher like that. But I recently got a MacBook4,1, courtesy of @dosdude1, and @Larsvonhier so that will be a big asset in this venture. I've currently reversed engineered MacPostFactor and attempted to package it into a bash but I haven't tested anything yet. Of course it's much easier having one of the actual developers to help me with it than trying to understand a pre built app
yes the apfs works on 2012 machines (it works on all macs that can run high sierra aka 2009 macbooks)
Isiah, please do. And welcome back.Definitely. I would love to collaborate with you guys
I don't have time to talk right now since I have to go sleep and then go to school in the morning. (Damn school cutting into my Catalina researching time.) Maybe we could take this discussion to the DMs and focus on Catalina here? I'm really looking forward to having your support on both of these projects. Thanks in advance for your participation and collaboration.
Oh and goodnight.
APFS can be used on traditional HDD's. I actually tested it on MacBook Pro Early 2011 (reinstalled High Sierra, formatted HDD to APFS), no problems at all.
Just downloaded and inspected the Installer.app (19A471t) and inside there is the typical "BaseSystem.dmg" in HFS, so I guess APFS should not be yet mandatory at least on this fresh beta 1 .
Yes - and the 32 bit forks from some frameworks (like OpenGL) and AppKit and CoreXYZ are gone...
you already have it installed ? how do the wallpapers look I heard they did away with dynamic ones
HFS or APFS ?
Some preview about .3 non-metal frameworks ? Do they still bring accel ?
IOUSB* worked OOB (for native HS machines) ?
Why prohibitory symbol on core apps ?
From your picture seems no transparency.
This not promising good.
Last edited:
looking foward to the resuelts guys love running thease Oses on my old macs
Interesting name. Catalina is a variation of the name Catherine . Probably comes from a place that has the name of a woman called Catherine.
I do not really get it how the read only volume was suppose to work, it does not make too much sense to me. An OS is dynamic, things change, swap, temporary files etc. Perhaps a part of the OS will run on two partitions, one read-only, with the kernel and essential kexts, and one for swap and temporary files. It does not seem like a good idea to split the OS into two, it should increase latency and slow down the performance, even for supported Macs.
I am waiting for signs from the Clover and FakeSMC developers on this issue. I assume the kernel requirements are the same as in Mojave. My biggest fear is that OpenGL is removed completely, altough it does not seem too likely.
I do not really get it how the read only volume was suppose to work, it does not make too much sense to me. An OS is dynamic, things change, swap, temporary files etc. Perhaps a part of the OS will run on two partitions, one read-only, with the kernel and essential kexts, and one for swap and temporary files. It does not seem like a good idea to split the OS into two, it should increase latency and slow down the performance, even for supported Macs.
I am waiting for signs from the Clover and FakeSMC developers on this issue. I assume the kernel requirements are the same as in Mojave. My biggest fear is that OpenGL is removed completely, altough it does not seem too likely.
Catalina Island in California.
Yes and he already has a preview installer for those of us bold enough to test...don't forget dosdude has a thread up too
Switching...EDIT: he has just a full downloader for now, but should be enough for some of us to manually install.
Last edited:
I downloaded with the preview installer on my mid 2009 iMac but need a firmware update waiting for the macOS Catalina Patcher
Hey, @0403979. This business with two threads is annoying and confusing. And no offense -- you've been a major contributor to the 10.14 thread, and your work on your own patcher is admirable -- but @dosdude1 is definitely the more well known and experienced leader in this effort. Would you be willing to consider merging the two threads to decrease confusion?
I'm sorry if this comes off as insulting in any way, I honestly don't mean it that way at all. I actually really admire your expertise and contributions, especially at your age. But I can just see this becoming a problem in future if we have to keep up with two discussions with the same name and topic.
Thanks.
Edit: Or, as another user suggested -- keep this thread, but make it specific to your patcher. But as a contributor to the effort, I just want one clear location to discuss advances.
Edit 2: Thanks for resolving this you guys.
I'm sorry if this comes off as insulting in any way, I honestly don't mean it that way at all. I actually really admire your expertise and contributions, especially at your age. But I can just see this becoming a problem in future if we have to keep up with two discussions with the same name and topic.
Thanks.
Edit: Or, as another user suggested -- keep this thread, but make it specific to your patcher. But as a contributor to the effort, I just want one clear location to discuss advances.
Edit 2: Thanks for resolving this you guys.
Last edited:
Did you say 4,1? as in the MacBook Early 2008 with X3100 GPU?
I really hope that's a typo, because that model doesn't even have Sierra or High Sierra running well on it because of the GPU. I highly recommend getting a late 2008 or newer macbook. As for the file system, it sounds like a non-issue. worst case APFS becomes mandatory. Something patches already exist for.
[doublepost=1559597406][/doublepost]
Actually afaik Foxlet and a handful of other devs pioneered the 10.12+ patch tools. Dosdude1 has only submitted a few patches and hosts all the files/builds good hype for the tools.
It runs, but without graphical acceleration. I agree with you that it's a bit of a stretch, at least for daily use. But it's a cool side project nonetheless! You can't help but be impressed that they got it to boot on 11-yo hardware.
[doublepost=1559597499][/doublepost]
@dosdude1 ran the entire 10.14 thread, wrote the patcher, and developed many of the fixes as well.
that's not the point. The point is that we already have extensive patching and documentation on running 10.12-10.14 on macbooks as old as the *late* 2008 5,1 with GeForce 9400M. The GMA GPU's are a nightmare and have nothing to build off of when it comes to OpenGL support in Metal-macOS. It'd require a massive amount of work to effectively restart on this macbook because of it's GPU. The best move if OP is looking for a development device is to sell this one for a full 5,2 or grab a 2009 5,2 board to put in his 4,1 case at a discount.
EDIT: and there was an error in my previous post, I have yet to see a successful install of anything past 10.11 on the 4,1, and 10.13 has zero documented support patched or otherwise.